Talk:2008 Summer Olympics

Opening Ceremony Times

The article lists the starting time as "8:08:08 PM Central Standard Time". This (incorrectly) translates as 12:08:08 UTC (it should be 02:08:08 UTC), as CST is UTC -6 Hours (-5 in summer). I don't have a source as to the actual time, so someone that does should probably change this.199.1.132.11 (talk) 22:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

CST = China Standard Time, not Central Standard Time. ---CWY2190^TC 22:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Participating NOCs vs Nations at the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, China

I know the former has been "hidden" until more information about the participating NOCs is available...but the latter is already being "filled in" with articles as and when information is available! Look at the Mali at the 2008 Olympics article, which confirms the Mali team as participating. There is nothing, other than being a polite Wikipedian, from me making the full NOC list available to point out that Mali and a few others are now certain particpants.

I guess my issue (such as it is) relates to whether the former section and the latter info-box are not, currently and very subtlely, in conflict with one another?

doktorb _words^deeds 18:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Mascots: The Fuwa:

I'm a bit confused: This article says that the Fuwa corespond with the five elements of traditional Chinese society: water, metal, fire, wood and earth

According to the pictures beside the text: This is not the right order, is it?

The single article "Fuwa" says something different about the elemens:

water, wood, fire, earth and sky.

Which one is corret?

P.S. I'm not a native speaker so maybe I'm sometimes grammatical incorrect.

---

It turns out, one fuwa represents air, wich is not an element, and one element wich is not a fuwa is metal. Noted such in article. Rustyfence (talk) 00:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Section 7.2 Class discrimination looks fishy

Can someone check the source (Singtao Shanghai news. Section A-14. [07-22-2007]) that says Communists are concerned about China's image? Also, it doesn't look very notable. If it is, it should be expanded with more information.Rustyfence (talk) 00:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Why was this removed? This was the hottest news topic in the east for weeks until the party decided to force everyone to self censor. Next to the anti-spitting campaign, these are all notable things unique to this olympic preparation. You cannot even find a news article supporting it now. Benjwong (talk) 23:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you really think it's possible? I don't know why China is depicted this way out of China. Wiki is not a ideology conflict battle field. Also, I don't see that has anything to do with the Olympics itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.248.216 (talk) 18:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Metal theft and the Summer Olympics

All the articles referenced in the section (from reliable sources and with titles like "Japanese metal stolen to 'feed China's Olympic boom'") link between the 2008 Summer Olympics and the rise in worldwide metal theft. So the metal theft section is relevant; please don't steal it. -- Gabi S. (talk) 16:35, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Just because a news article claims it is relevant doesn't mean it belongs on Wikipedia. I vote to remove the section.--152.228.0.100 (talk) 15:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

RFC on "increased metal theft caused by the Olympics"

Should the article mention that "The 2008 Olympics has caused the rise in metal theft around the world?" Is it noteworthy enough? Is it giving undue weigh to that particular situation? Oidia (talk) 02:53, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

All the references in the section state about the thefts and rise in metal prices across the world. All these articles make a general statement about scarcity of metals and thus the rise in prices. None of them is explicit enough to state that people are stealing metal to sell it for contruction of Olympic stadium in china. [1] just states in the end that "Demand in China is strong ahead of the 2008 Olympics in Beijing". It doesnt state directly that stolen metal is used in china. Same is the case with other references too...India and china are emerging markets for construction industry and obviously demand is high in these countries. What the references say is 2 different things- metal stealing and high demand in these countries. Now u linking these two together to arrive at a conclusion could be seen as "Original research" which is not allowed in Wikipedia. To include this in article we need strong evidence which explicitly states the allegation. I believe that even if the allegations are true then it isnt noteworthy to include it. As the above editor mentioned, "it would give undue weightage to this particular situation". Gprince007 (talk) 06:23, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, first of all it isn't original research at all. Almost all the articles explicitly link the rise in metal theft to the olympics: "Industry insiders have been quick to point the finger at China, where the stolen metal is allegedly sold as scrap to feed a construction boom ahead of next summer's Olympics" [2], "The copper is going through larger scrapyards, then to smelters and then by ship to China, which has an incredible demand for copper, particularly with the Beijing Olympics coming and the demand for telecoms infrastructure," Mr Trotter said [3], and "In China, construction for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games has increased demand for recycled metal exports, DeJesus said [4]. Second, it is not given undue weight, just read the Telegraph article carefully to get a feeling of the havoc wreaked on North West England because of the olympics - telephone cables, the roof of a church, manhole covers... and it also mentions incidents in Australia and South Africa. It is an unexpected side effect that was never experienced at earlier olympics (maybe because China has so much infrastructure to build in such a short time), that it is definitely relevant and worth mentioning. And the last thing, the handful of references that I provided are just the tip of the iceberg. There are much more reported incidents of metal theft linked to the Beijing Olympics; I just picked a few. It's a well-known phenomenom that has to be documented. -- Gabi S. (talk) 06:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

A is ahead of B does not mean I causes B. Yes, hosting the Olympics boosts the economy, and the hot economy demands more metal, but China's economy has been hot for a very long time; and the Olympics impact to the economy is not influential. Under the current budget, Beijing is projecting a 0.8% GDP increase, which can hardly described as an important factor[5]. And don't forget, Athens went way over budget and posted a financial loss. On the other hand, I am sure oil demand has been very high too and increased more than 0.8% in the past few years and in the 70s, but I can not find any mentioning of stealing gas or gas cap lock in the oil crisis articles. --Skyfiler (talk) 13:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Skyfiler and thats precisely my point. Just becos rat population is increasing in a town doesnt necessarily mean that the town has no cats; similarly just becos there is a huge demand in china doesnt necessary mean that all stolen metal is diverted to that country. "Industry insiders" cant be cited as reliable sources...who are these "insiders" ? the metal is "allegedely" sold...pls note that they are alleging and that they are not "sure" of this fact. similary in the second reference "... China, which has an incredible demand for copper, particularly with the Beijing Olympics coming ..." Maybe a part of the stolen metal might be goin to china but that doesnt mean that all the metal stolen by people across the world are being sent to china to build the infrastructure. It may be a miniscule percentage and that too "may be"....its not confirmed...this story has not had wide coverage at all. The sources which u have included are about metal theft in general and not about "Stolen metal used in China exclusively" .....this paragraph may seem ok in a article about "Metal thefts across the world" but i dont see any reason to include it in this article about olympics. this paragraph is trivial information ...something similar to this version in which there was a trivial paragrapgh about class discrimination and toilet facilities. Similary the metal theft section is trivial info which is not needed. The theft issue has not been raised at any official level...no country or olympic commitee has made any accusations, so i dont think it needs any coverage in an encyclopaedic article. Gprince007 (talk) 14:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

It looks like you underestimate the quoted experts. These are not "unreliable insiders" as you portray them. In two of the articles, the persons that link between metal theft and the Beijing Olympics are identified by name and position: Andy Trotter, deputy chief constable of the British Transport police, and Detective Sam DeJesus of the Seattle Police Department's pawn and commercial security unit. These look like sources reliable enough for me, and if they say that the metal goes to China then I think they're right (I can easily find more reliable sources if needed). Regarding the other issues: Skyfiler mentions the oil market in relation to the metal scrap market, while in fact these are two very different markets. And it's true that no country or olympic commitee has made any accusations, but I think that's because the worldwide metal scrap market is run by mobs rather than governments. In other words, no one can formally accuse the Chinese government, but still police officers that follow the stolen metal find out that it goes to the Beijing National Stadium. Maybe it doesn't need any wide coverage, but I think it is still worth mentioning - and of course I will update the metal theft article as well. Please let some other people express their opinions here before you make changes to the article. -- Gabi S. (talk) 17:22, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

A cop making these statements may or may not be reliable. I mean did he prove it in the court of law??? were any arrests made??? Was there any international mayhem???...The answer is no. We need credible references which explicitly state the allegation. As i said before, this paragrapgh maybe appropriate in a "metal theft" article....but i certainly dont feel it should be put in in this article. What you are suggesting is a far-fetched remote possibility backed by references based on flimsy grounds. I mean...u make it sound as if all the stolen metal in the whole world is being diverted to china for construction purposes and whole world is sitting quiet and turning a blind eye to it !!! We need a rational explanation for this. Dont forget about wikipedia's policy about exceptional claims and undue weightage being given to some fringe topics. Gprince007 (talk) 14:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I also agree with the editors in support of leaving this info out of the article, for now. Correlation doesn't imply causality- I'd want to see real evidence of the rise in incidence of metal theft as it relates to the Olympics. So far, there isn't much here that truly supports that theory. Leave it out of the entry, for now. Secretagentwang (talk) 15:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Notice that Industrial history of the People's Republic of China#Iron and steel and Industrial history of the People's Republic of China#Iron ore indicate that China is an importer of iron/steel due to not being able to produce enough to meet demand. Why would worldwide scrap metal be affected by a country which can't make enough steel to meet its own needs? If scrap iron is going to China, much of the scrap should be going to the other countries which are making what China is importing. If the situation in that article has changed, then that article needs to be updated. -- SEWilco (talk) 16:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

There are going to be dozens of semi-related stories for the 2008 Games as they draw nearer. This article should not be a dumping ground for them. For this particular story, I would say that a single sentence, properly cited and with a wikilink to metal theft where the phenomenon can be described in more detail, is the appropriate "due weight". We don't want this top-level summary article getting "crufty". — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I think first any weight has to be shown. If an Olympics is causing enough stress on a single country's metal processing that global supplies are being affected, there should be some professional reports about it. Have metal prices risen globally, and have reports on those increases mentioned these Olympics? Have export and scrap metal industry analysts reported on this demand? -- SEWilco (talk) 18:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think Olympics is the deciding factor. The normal economy growth is around 9%, which is ten times of the Olympic impact to the economy. If the Olympic is moved to somewhere else, the normal growth would still demand roughly the same amount of metal. In a country with 10 trillion GDP, a few billion is not that a big deal.--Skyfiler (talk) 13:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I understand that the figures seem to indicate that metal theft is not very significant, yet there are many people who still claim that the increase in metal theft has something to do with the Olympic Games. I will understand if the relevant article section is reduced to one sentence or even removed completely, but I don't understand the contradiction between what the quoted people say and the economic measures listed above. -- Gabi S. (talk) 18:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

It is a matter of relevance between subjects. The effects of the content (metal stealing) on the subject (the 2008 Olympics) is not established by your source and should not be used to justify a place in the article concerning the subject. You can try to argue the other way around and mention 2008 Olympics in the metal stealing article using your source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyfiler (talk • contribs) 00:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

This seems to be an argument about 2 different things: 1) Whether there is a significant effect and 2) Whether it is fair to include it in terms of weight. I believe a better way to go about this would be to replace the metal theft section with a section on China's economic growth and changes, etc. resulting from the Olympics, and a metal theft line could be added in there should this discussion show the claims to be viable. Sander9860 (talk) 05:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Sander. China's rapid growth has been straining many natural resources. A section on China's growth and how the Olympics have possibly accelerated that growth further would be much more appropriate than singling out one resource and blaming it on the Olympics. China would be growing anyway. I think there would need to be a more substantial direct link between the stolen goods and Olympic venue construction. Otherwise this seems very abritrary.Foreverlove77 (talk) 10:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Should this be added?

[6] Should it be added on this page or the Great Britain page or both? ---CWY2190^TC 19:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at Wikipedia:Relevance of content--Skyfiler (talk) 17:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Should the 2mliion Beijing local be evicted be added? It's totally insane to even think about evicting 2 million ppl. Which is also impossible. I don't know why ppl like to use a news from a Tabloid to "prove" themselves. Be serious!

Long, weak and POV "concerns and controversies" section

It needs to be rewritten. Just now I'm moving "Broadcasting" section out, because even if it contains controversies it is a separate topic of the Games coverage. And I'm moving the section "Rise in metal theft" here. First, it needs to be rewritten, rise in price of any goods always stimulates the theft, so, the metal theft is not directly related to the Games, only the rise in metal price should be attributed to the Games, if any. Second, one should prove, that the Games is the main factor that increases the metal price in China and the major contributor to their global increase. After all, China accounts for only 20% of global copper consumption, what about other 80%? Maybe the major factor of the price increase blongs to those 80%? Oil prices also greatly increased in that period, maybe this was the main factor for the metal price increase? So, here is the section text, please suggest improvements, that I asked for:

"Preparations for the Beijing Olympics increased drastically the demand for copper and other types of metal. The global price of copper has risen fivefold during the 2001-2007 period. China accounts for about 20% of global copper consumption. Metal and copper are used for traffic and communication infrastructures for the Olympics, as well as for sport facilities such as the new Beijing "Bird's nest" stadium, which requires tons of scrap metal.

In Japan there were 5,700 metal theft reported cases in 2007 in locations as far apart as Shizuoka, Hiroshima and Okinawa. Similar rises in metal theft was observed during 2006-2007 in the UK, US, Israel, Ukraine, and other countries worldwide. Most cases were linked to the increased demand due to the Olympic Games. In North West England metal theft is still on the rise as of 2008" Av0id3r (talk) 01:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

All the referenced articles in the section "Rise in metal theft" include official claims made by police officers in the USA, UK and Japan that claim that there is a rise in metal theft, and that the Games are the main reason for it. It's not POV, it's not OR, and it's well-sourced. I agree that it's not a major issue, but it is relevant and deserves a handful of lines in the article. -- Gabi S. (talk) 20:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Mia Farrow and the Summer Olympics in Beijing

Mia Farrow's comparison of Beijing with the 1936 Berlin Olympics is not out of order. These are the most political games since then. [7]--85.220.93.45 (talk) 16:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Philippine telecast of 2008 Olympics

If RPN or ABS-CBN will be select to broadcast the Olympics in August 8. Our cable provider SkyCable lost its three Solar Entertainment channels. ABS-CBN broadcasted the 1992 Olympic Games in Barcelona. If ABS-CBN will choose the network to simulcast the Olympics in Beijing and the Filipinos will watch the Olympics. -- 13:54, February 18, 2008 (UTC)

Equestrian events in Hong Kong

Are we certain that the Sports Federation and Olympic Committee of Hong Kong (NOC for HKG) is actually responsible for the equestrian events, as opposed to the Beijing Olympic Committee and/or Chinese Olympic Committee retaining responsibility and simply hosting those events in another city (akin to the way the football tournament is usually held in multiple cities, and sailing events are often outside the host city)? I think the distinction is significant, and unless the HKG NOC is actually involved, we should stop drawing the similarity with 1956, where the Swedish Olympic Commitee had jurisdiction over the equestrian events in Stockholm, and the Melbourne organizing committee had nothing to do with it. In that case, it makes sense to claim that the 1956 Games were split between two NOCs, but I'm not 100% sure the situation in 2008 is comparable. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, this is true. We'll have to find this out. Jared (t)  23:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)